Despite all the doom scrolling, Harris has a comfortable lead in the electoral college right now.

The time for vibing is over. It’s too late to change anyone’s opinions (especially because national level events like debates are over). Harris will finish her Media Blitz soon (including a Fox News showing) while Trump retreats into his shell hoping no one notices how damn stupid his mouth is.

This is the time for doing. The focus should be on voter drives and other get out the vote pushes. It’s mid October, and the October surprises are against Trump and in our favor.

It’s not the lead we wanted but it’s a lead nonetheless. Don’t talk yourself out of believing this lead because of a bad poll or two.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    42
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Harris has a comfortable lead in the electoral college right now.

    As much as I want to buy into this optimism, I’m having trouble equating Harris’s marginal lead in the average national polls with a comfortable electoral college lead.

    When battleground state polling is within the margin for error for states she needs to win and the no toss-ups map looks like this, you really need to have an abundance of faith in professional poll aggregators’ judgement and weightings to feel comfortable.

    From the data table at the bottom of this Nate Silver article (below the sports betting), he suggests Harris needs to win the popular vote by a +2 to +3 margin in order to have a greater than 50% probability of winning the electoral college. The latest polling from the Silver Bulletin has her at +2.9, just enough to give her “a slight advantage, but with emphasis on slight.”

    Nothing about this makes me feel comfortable.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      As much as I want to buy into this optimism, I’m having trouble equating Harris’s marginal lead in the average national polls with a comfortable electoral college lead.

      Trump can win Nevada, North Carolina, Georgia, AND Arizona but Harris would still win if she gets Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.

      That’s a comfortable lead no matter how you spin it. Its a lead, but within the margin of error. So there’s work to do, in particular we must now step to the polls and vote. Close this out.


      National polls don’t matter. Ignore them. Focus on the electoral college maps and the specific states.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        That’s a comfortable lead no matter how you spin it.

        My brother in anti-Trumpism, the only spin here is yours in saying her lead is comfortable.

        Your original OpEd focused on national polling, so that’s what I responded to. But yes, ignore the national polling, focus on the swing states, the electoral college is what counts.

        From the same WaPo article as your picture is this swing state focused chart:

        It shows the 2020 polling error, which was largely in Trump’s favor in swing states (other than GA). If the same polling error still exists now in 2024, all that comfort disappears. The polling error was even greater in Trump’s favor in 2016, however was in Obama’s favor in 2012.

        The point not being that Trump will outperform the polls this time, but that margins of error matter, and the reality could swing either way. With polling in so many states being within the margins, we’re likely seeing the closest election of our lifetimes.

        And all this isn’t meant to be doom and gloom, but I ain’t going into this election with Clinton levels of comfort, again. You’re absolutely right on the game plan though. If you live in any of these states, your vote this time will likely be more consequential than it ever will be.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      41 day ago

      Yeah and Nate Silver was calling a landslide Clinton victory, too. It’s just another talking head.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        31 day ago

        I was following that. Nate was saying 71.4% chance for Clinton (just checked again) when basically all of the rest of the media was treating it like 99%. Effectively he was the one suggesting she might actually lose. (Even if it still didn’t seem likely)

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          217 hours ago

          Just two days out he even had her probability of winning at just 64.2%, still better odds than what we’re seeing for Harris right now. And you’re right, he was the only reputable poll aggregator who was making downward adjustments of that magnitude, that late in the race.